SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2016 Supreme(Tri) 87

S.TALAPATRA
Jiban Krishna Banik – Appellant
Versus
Tripura Gramin Bank – Respondent


Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner:Mr. D.K. Biswas, Advocate
For the Respondent: Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, Addl. G.A.

ORDER :

Both these writ petitions, seeking judicial review of the final order passed on culmination of the disciplinary proceeding, are faced with the identical question whether this Court can review the finding of the fact as returned in the disciplinary proceeding and hence, these writ petitions are clustered for disposal by a common judgment. However, for laying the perspective, the factual matrix be laid briefly and separately.

I have heard Mr. A.K. Bhowmik, learned senior counsel and Mr. D.K. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. K. Bhattacharjee, learned counsel for the respondents.

2. Lord Haltom in Chief Constable of the North Wales Police vs. Evans, reported in (1982) 3 ALL ER 141 observed:

“The purpose of judicial review is to ensure that the individual receives, fair treatment and not to ensure that the authority, after according fair treatment, reaches, on a matter which it is authorised by law to decide for itself, a conclusion which is correct in the eyes o

























































































































Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top